FirstAlerts
Plane CrashesVersion 2

Cessna 150 collides with Pennsylvania State Police helicopter near Carlisle; pilot killed

A Cessna 150 struck a hovering Pennsylvania State Police helicopter near Carlisle, Pennsylvania, killing the Cessna pilot and injuring two troopers, according to multiple reports.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 20, 2026, 11:37 a.m. ETUpdated Sep 7, 2026, 3:22 a.m. ET
A collided with a helicopter near , Pennsylvania, on either August 19, 2025, or August 19, 2026, according to conflicting reports from fox13seattle.com and dailycaller.com. The time of the collision was reported as by phillyvoice.com, by fox13seattle.com, and by dailycaller.com. The Cessna pilot, identified as Paul William Sokoloski, 57, of Hershey, was killed, dailycaller.com reported. troopers were injured and survived, according to dailycaller.com and fox13seattle.com. The helicopter, a Bell 407, was conducting routine training exercises and was hovering several feet above the ground when the Cessna veered sharply to the right for an unknown reason, struck the helicopter's rear tail rotor, and then hit the main rotor, according to phillyvoice.com. The Cessna crashed to the ground and was severed into multiple pieces; the helicopter rolled, inverted, and crashed onto its side. The troopers were trapped until one pushed a window out, phillyvoice.com reported. The National Transportation Safety Board and the FAA are investigating, with the also involved, according to phillyvoice.com, dailycaller.com, and fox13seattle.com. The cause of the collision has not been determined. The NTSB arrived at Airport early Thursday to begin its investigation, fox13seattle.com reported, while dailycaller.com reported that Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy committed to aiding Governor Josh Shapiro in the NTSB's investigation. The wreckage will be moved to Delaware for investigation, according to phillyvoice.com. Registry records list the as operating nine aircraft, one of which is a Cessna 208 B registered in the ; the aircraft involved in the incident has not been identified.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Reference data

From aircraft and geographic registries, not from the news sources. Registry records can be out of date, and describe the aircraft and the place only — they say nothing about what happened.

Terrain elevation
479 ft
Nearest aerodrome
1.2 miles NW of Carlisle Airport (KN94)

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 27 Sept 2026, 07:22current

    Added conflicting date, time, and investigation status details; added operator fleet registry information; clarified that the aircraft involved has not been identified.

  2. Version 16 Sept 2026, 09:45

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.